Hans-Georg Gadamer's Theory of Play

Posted:2006-5-29 14:27:00 Browse:60 Times

Abstract: Hans-Georg Gadamer There are three game theory. His report on the general theory
of the game can be summarized as "self as" theory: the game is based on self-expression for
the intrinsic purpose of the activities of the self. He was on the understanding of "game" the
doctrine can be summarized as "fusion" theory: understanding the "game" is the main sense of
participation in each other and thus have a re-integration of the cycle of creative spirit of
exchange activities. Gadamer's understanding of the art of the game as a "game" typical. His
theories on the art of the game can be summed up as "composite" theory: art is the
combination of emotional and non-emotional performance of the composite consciousness and
acceptance of activities is a composite understanding of "game." Gadamer's concept of the
three games as well as between the corresponding three kinds of game theory or application of
the universality of the surface layer by layer between the descending constitute an inclusive
relationship.

Keywords: Gadamer; game; understand the game; art game; from the theory; integration of
theory; composite theory

Hans-Georg Gadamer is a landmark in the history of Western philosophy and philosophers,

one of the few, but also to talk about the game known as one of the few philosophers. As
Gadamer's great reputation, and his well-known game theory is particularly great. However,
apart from a small number of specialized theoretical workers, ordinary people as well as a
considerable portion of humanities scholars do not understand the theory of Gadamer's games.
In order to facilitate people's understanding of Gadamer's game theory and see its essence and
scope of application on the basis of a correct attitude toward it, and this paper will be the game
of his theory of the sort made as comprehensive as possible and on this basis, to show that he
The overall look of the game ideas and internal relations.

Gadamer's hermeneutic representatives are. He is in his writings about the game hermeneutics
and hermeneutics expounded his ideas in the process step by step to start his concept of the
game. Hans-Georg Gadamer in the eyes of the game is the nature of activities? To answer this
question, let us first take a look at Gadamer I deal specifically with regard to the game.

First, the game of sexual self, self-expression, and closed

Teleological nature of the activities to look at life, one of the basic methodology. Body of the
game of life, Gadamer is also starting to look at from the teleology of its nature. He said:
"Children are from the ground game, even though they carry out the performance of
activities"; "game is a kind of self-movement, it is not through the campaign to pursue the
goals and objectives, but as a sports movement." 1) (p140) At this point, Gadamer called
"objective" in fact means (to seek external things) external purpose (with Kant and others for
the "purpose" the same use of the term), while his said, "Since the" intrinsic purpose is clearly
another way of saying. Can be seen: On the game, Gadamer justifies it (with Kant, Huizinga
and others the same as) the intrinsic teleological point of view. Included in a teleological basis,
Hans-Georg Gadamer further the game's internal purposes or for sexual self-understood as
self-expression. He said: "The existence of the game way to self-expression (selbstdarstellung).
Naishi self-expression and the widespread existence of the state of nature (seinsaspekt)." 2)
(pp139-140) At this point, the game as Gadamer the nature of things according to their
performance in their own activities. Such things, the activities of self-expression is naturally
inherent purpose. However, human and sometimes the game would have been seeking to avoid
losing or winning the class with the incentive of the external objective of this phenomenon and
the inherent teleology of Gadamer's concept of the game seems to be inconsistent. In this
regard, Gadamer explains: "Human the game of self-expression, even though as we have seen
that, based on a surface with the purpose of the game linked above behavior, but the games
'significance' is not so much achieve this goal. We would prefer that the task of self-delivery of
the game is actually kind of self-expression. the game of self-expression on the players as if
this has led to the game through his performance of something that is something to achieve his
own unique self-expression. "3) (p139) At this point, Gadamer that: the human external
purposes in certain games there is the phenomenon is a kind of superficial. Because: This is
not the purpose of the game outside the final or real purpose, but rather an intermediate
purposes. Compared with the ultimate goal of self-expression, this is really just the middle of
the purpose of the performance to arouse people's desire and ability so that the game can be a
means of better. Can be seen: From a teleological perspective on the nature of the game from
the ultimate goal of the view, not from the middle to see its purpose; otherwise, we may look at
the nature of the game is unclear.

To engage in certain activities may change the purpose, thus, the nature of such activities will
also change. The same is true of the performance of the activities of people. Hans-Georg
Gadamer said: "The game is not for the performance of any person, that is, it does not point to
the audience. ... ... Even those in the audience in front of a class of sports games, do not point
to the audience. Indeed, these As the race to become the game's performance itself is facing the
loss of the game as a contest the nature of the real risk of the game. " 4) (140) At this point,
Gadamer pointed out: the game is the performance of activities, but the performance of
activities are not necessarily the game. Because: Only for-that is the purpose of the
performance of the activities is the inner game suits the purpose of the performance of
activities are not in the game. As a result, even if the performance of activities in the content
and form, and has not changed, but if the purpose took place internal and external
transformation, then it also occurred in the nature of the game and non-game conversion. Can
be seen both inside and outside the purpose of the activity in the nature of the game and Non-
game of a decisive influence.

By Huizinga effects of Gadamer also talked about the game closed. Just that what he said
actually refers to the closed nature of sexual self. Since the significance of this closure on the
nature of the game is good for the individual to understand; but the participants had been
divided for the performers and the viewers of the "game" it is not how good you understand.
Because: This "game" in the performance of those who can be said for the viewers and the
main performance; a result, from the performers point of view, his pattern of behavior (mainly)
is a he, not for-. However, Hans-Georg Gadamer said: the nature of this game should be
relative to the performers and the viewers by the composition of the Community for the
interaction, rather than in relation to which party is in. As he said: This game "is a game and
watch the whole composed of those" 5) (p141); In this game, "leading to a public audience in
the (offensein) together constitute the closed nature of the game . Only the audience was able
to achieve the game as a game thing. " 6) (p141) In other words, as opposed to by the
performers and the viewers together constitute a community, this performance and watch
dependent complementary activities as a whole remains a for-or closed.

In the above discussion, we find: For the performers and the viewers have already divided the
performance of activities, Gadamer's sometimes said that if the performance of "point" that is
not the game for the audience, and sometimes it is said that the audience participation that
makes the performance of activities into the game. See: Hans-Georg Gadamer on this game
between the two statements are contradictory. But in fact, the cause of this contradiction is to
Gadamer in different places to talk about a game the same position occurs when the conversion
- from the individual's position converted to the Community's position. In this position clear
after the conversion, Hans-Georg Gadamer's remarks about the games contained in the above-
mentioned conflicts also can be eliminated. However, we still should be pointed out: This
shows the position without the conversion, after all, it is easy to be misleading, and therefore
should be avoided.

In addition to sexual sense of self-closed, the Hans-Georg Gadamer Huizinga also talked about
the game the same, especially in the temporal and spatial characteristics of the closed nature of
the spatial features. He said: "pre-space limits of the provisions of the rules of the game and
order, constitute the essence of a game ... .... Gaming activities of the game space is a kind
of ... ... defined specifically for the gaming activities and retention of space. Human beings
need them the game the game venues. defined the area of the game - as Huizinga has rightly
emphasized, fully as sacred as the definition of the region - as a closed world of the game
world with no purpose of transition and intermediation in the world against each other. " 7)
(pp137-138) for some (not all) group games, humans will indeed specially arranged in some
specific places (such as theaters, gymnasiums, churches, etc.) carried out. The purposes of
these establishments, as well as the private nature of space-related structural characteristics
that make these places in the human activities in space shows some kind of unique. This places
special significance on the closed nature of the activities will become a place where a sign.
Thus, the closed nature of the game space can be said that the closed nature of the game (since
for sex) is a symbol.

Second, the game relaxed and happy nature and seriousness of the

Games are usually very relaxed and happy. This nature of the game, Hans-Georg Gadamer
said: "The game's activities not only belongs to no purpose and intent, and there is no
tension ... .... Easily the game of subjectively as feelings of relief were, of course, this ease of
not referring to the actual lack of tension, but rather a lack of tension on the phenomenological
sense. the order structure of the game so that players seem to focus on their own, and make
him come out of that is causing the tension in the true sense of the initiative's mission . " 8)
(pp134-135) He added: "the true nature of the game is to make people out of the game that he
was in the pursuit of purpose in the process of felt tension." 9) (p138) as long as the clear
Gadamer's talk here of the "purpose" refers to the external end, we can understand: Hans-
Georg Gadamer is in fact the purpose of internal and external use to explain the nature of the
activities of the reason why gives a different feeling because - outside the purpose of activity is
forced, therefore, the main feeling is serious, intense and sometimes painful; while the purpose
of the inner nature of the game was to make the game need not be affected by the external
purposes of coercion, and thus feel free, easy and enjoyable.

As the games are usually very relaxed and happy, and therefore, the game has often been
viewed as not serious activities. However, Gadamer does not agree with this view. He said:
"play activities with the serious nature of things there is a unique association. This is not only
because of the activities of the game in the game has a 'purpose', as Aristotle said, it is 'in order
to break with the rules' and generated. a more important reason is that the game activity itself
has a unique and serious even is sacred. However, the behavior of the game, all those
provisions that the activities and got incredibly with the purpose of this in the relationship is
not simply disappear not see, but in a unique way of being laced together (verschweben) ... ....
As a player, but also means that the association itself with the serious. Only when the player
concentrate on the game, play activities will achieve it which has a purpose. makes the game
exclusively as a game, not stemmed out from the game associated with serious, but only when
the seriousness of the game. who does not treat the game seriously, who is the destroyer of the
game. " 10) (pp130-131) At this point, Gadamer pointed out: the game has its seriousness. The
reason, in addition to the game will be indirectly associated with the external purposes, but
more importantly, the game has its own purpose. To achieve any purpose that people need to
seriously deal with the activities used to achieve this purpose. Just that the purpose of
corresponding to the different nature of activity, there are also different types of seriousness.
According to the nature of the purpose, we can relative to the seriousness of purpose within
and outside are known as the seriousness of the internal and external seriousness. The
seriousness of the game is mainly relative to the underlying purpose of the game's inherent
seriousness, but also indirectly contain other activities in relation to the external purpose of the
seriousness of the external components.

Discussion of this point, we can Gadamer's concept of making a preliminary summary of the
game: The game is based on self-expression for the intrinsic purpose of the activities of the
self. The game is easy and pleasant, but people's attitude towards the game should remain
serious.

Hans-Georg Gadamer on the game is basically the above-mentioned discussion with people
about the game in general in line with experience, and therefore not difficult to understand.
However, when Hans-Georg Gadamer in excess of the general experience of the people on the
game to talk about the level of the game, he was on the "game" remarks is not how good you
understand. Now, let us take a look at Hans-Georg Gadamer on the "game" nature of the other
comments.

3, (understanding) the game of self-subjectivity

In accordance with common sense, of course, the game's main players - the game engaged in
the activities of things. However, Hans-Georg Gadamer said: "The true subject of the game
(which is most evident that only a single player experience) are not the player, but the game
itself." 11) (p137) Why? It turned out that by means of the "game" set out his interpretation of
the concept of Thought, Gadamer gives a "game" in an unusual new meaning. When Hans-
Georg Gadamer said that "the game's main feature is the game itself," he explain the fact the
game has become a kind of human modes of existence - an individual involved in each other,
blending to form a complementary whole existence dependent model . In this mode, there is an
individual because of Rong Jin lost a whole or the loss of independence of individual
subjectivity, therefore, in this pattern of activity can be said that no individual subject. Because
of this activity in the individual behavior is an integral part of the overall behavior, thus, acts
as if the whole game, then the whole individual behavior can not be called games. As Hans-
Georg Gadamer said: "player's behavior and the game itself should be different from the
game's behavior is the main sexual and other behavior associated with." 12) (p130) He added:
"Game has a unique nature, it is independent of those who engage in gaming activities of the
human consciousness ... .... Where there is no run game in the behavior of the subject areas,
there is game, and there is a real game ... .... the game is not following the nature of existence,
namely that there must be a subject to engage in play activities, so as to let the game to
proceed. " 13) (pp132-133) At this point, we see: In Gadamer's conception of a particular
game, with the independent status of the individual main acts can not be called the game; on
the contrary, only when an individual from being lost in the overall it no longer exists as an
independent subject, he and other individuals as a whole composed of the activities can be
called a game.

With experience in a scientific perspective, there is always the existence of beings, events
always have a commitment to persons. If the event is called the bearer of the main body, then,
even in individuals not known as the (full) of the main activities, but also there are still a
subject of something called, it is by mutual cooperation among the individuals relations
constitute the whole. Hans-Georg Gadamer Why do not you will serve as the bearers of the
overall activity as the main body, instead of the whole event is called the principal do? Let's
take a look at Gadamer I are interpreting it. He said: "Huizinga took note of the fact that the
following language: 'While one can say in German' ein speil treiben (in games) ', with the
Dutch say' een spelletje doen (for games), 'but the real verb Naishi Games (spielen) itself, the
game is a game that people (man spiel ein spiel). In other words, in order to the performance of
such activities, the concept of terms contained in the verb must be repeated. in respect of all
these phenomena of view, this means that such activities have such a special and independent
nature, that it is fundamentally different from the usual sense of the kind of activity. ' "14)
(p133) He added:" The original meaning of the game thus an passive and contains the meaning
of the initiative (der mediale sinn). So, we talked about some kind of game, he said, or when
there is something 'in the game', something that has been in the game, some things that exist in
the game. " 15) (p133) In many languages, the usage of the word game has a passive character
in the initiative, see: When we say "we do / play games", the subject of the game, as issued by
the behavior of those who always will inevitably be included in the game itself as the object.
As a result, at the pragmatic level, it can be said, the game is always the game and their actions
include on its own being. By Hans-Georg Gadamer's own words, that the game is always
beyond the players and their behavior and become dominant, as he put it: "The language, the
true subject of the game is obviously not that, among other activities, also carried the game
subjectivity of things, but the game itself. "16) (p134) and" the charm of the game ... ... is
beyond the players in the game to become dominant. "17) (p137) we see: Hans-Georg
Gadamer from the" game, "the special use of the term leads to the game of self-subjectivity.
This pragmatic approach with specific games to prove the practice of self-subjectivity leaves
the reader feeling forced. In fact, if there is to introduce the idea of ontology, then the so-called
"game of self-subjectivity" would be easier to understand. We know that: The traditional
philosophical level in the presence of those who look for the existence or origin of the world
body. However, the existentialist thought: a qualitative beings are formed in the course of
existence; so, the existence of those in existence have a logical priority; As a result, there is the
existence of those origins is also the ontology. Compared with the traditional philosophy,
existentialism philosophy ontology on an angle or position of the conversion, there were
shifted from the existence of the event shifted from the objects; or, to use linguistic terms that
are shifted from the subject predicate, from the noun turned verb. This is the existence of the
so-called ontology. In existential terms, ontology is the event rather than an object. As a result,
there is the ontological standing position, the game can be seen as those who generate the
activities of the game, that produced the game's event ontology. On this basis, as long as with
the main body for each solution, we can easily get the game of self-subjectivity conclusions.
Of course, there is also a metaphysical doctrine. According to this metaphysics may result in
the so-called "game is not a game but rather as the main body of the game itself," the
conclusion can only be a departure from the common experience of the game metaphysics, but
can not be a scientific conclusion. In fact, when Hans-Georg Gadamer gives "game" is to
"blending between the main symbiotic activity" meaning, he said "game" actually has become
the understanding - between the main exchange activities - the pronoun. His intention at this
time has also been talking about the game is not as comprehensive and accurate grasp of the
game known as the activities of the common, but rather by the "game" the interpretation of the
word to express his thoughts and studies related to hermeneutics artistic thought. As Gadamer
himself confession: "I found the game in art typical of the phenomenon of Hermeneutics" 18)
(p83); "if we experience in relationships and art to talk about the game, then the game does not
refer to the attitude of , do not even refer to activities or appreciation of the activities of the
creation of emotional state, but also do not mean in the game achieved a certain subjectivity of
freedom, but the very existence of works of art that way. "19) (p130) He further confession:
for understanding the mode of talking about the game, "We do not inquire about the nature of
the game, but to ask the question existence of such games." 20) (p131)

Let us note: Gadamer's hermeneutics in the set of his thinking when he said "game" is actually
referring to understand the activities and not in the usual sense of the game, and this
understanding of the activities as a "game" is Jiada Merle by focusing on the "game." Now, let
us take a look at Hans-Georg Gadamer on the understanding of "game" for further discussion.

4, (understanding) the game participation, then creativity and intermediary

Interpret the game in the exchanges between the main activity, the main sense of mutual
participation between the course of such activities has become an intrinsic attribute of the
following reasons: participation is the basis for interaction. On the understanding of "game" of
participation, Hans-Georg Gadamer, for example drama, said: Drama "is an essential need of
the audience play behavior. ... ... In the viewer where they gain their full meaning only." 21)
( p140) In Gadamer's view, such a performance for the theater and watch the game who have
been divided, the performance of the performance of unilateral activities of those who do not
constitute a complete game; the integrity of the game to be viewers participation. The usual
view of the performance of the performance activity is a complete game, viewers of the
presence or absence of Daoshi unimportant. Gadamer's view: This view is extremely one-
sided. In order to change people for such one-sided view of this game, and even more to
promote his hermeneutic thought, Gadamer's emphasis on the conscious participation of the
viewer for the importance of the game. He said: "The game itself is run by the game and watch
the whole composed of persons. In fact, the most realistic gaming experience, and games of the
proper performance of his own 'means' and is not involved in the game that Naishi , but only
those who watch the game. in the viewer, where the game seems to have been elevated to its
ideals. "22) (p141) He even said:" Only viewers of the game to achieve something as a
game. ... ... in the whole drama [view games], we should occur is not a game, but for the
viewer. This is the game to become a drama [view games] games when the game took place as
a kind of fundamental change. Such a change could make the viewer in a game to the status.
just for the viewer - not for the players, but watching who - rather than the players, the game
was played the role of the game. "23) (pp141-142) read in Gadamer to: "Game is for the
viewer exists," 24) (p142) or that performance is in order to be watching and there. As a result,
if there is no audience, the performance of the purpose and meaning will be lost. From this
perspective, the significance of the performance can be said that given by the watch, so watch
the entire game can be said that the dominant position. But in any case, performance is always
watching to be a prerequisite; for the performance and watch the game have been divided, it
always depends on the integrity of the combination of performance and viewing. So, watch the
game one-sided emphasis on the importance of the activities is not appropriate. In this regard,
Gadamer is also well aware, so to say, then, after the above-mentioned radical, he admitted:
"Watch who just have a methodological priority." 25) (p142)

Let us not forget: Hans-Georg Gadamer on this are talking about the understanding of the
game is actually referring to the activities. On this basis, contact hermeneutics of his thinking,
we can see: He has stressed the role of viewing in the game, in fact, or because he wanted to
take this to express his interpretation of Thought. Broadly speaking, the activities of any
symbol is a kind of acceptance of products that is to understand the activities of viewing
activities. In Gadamer's view: the understanding is not the original intent of the reappearance
of the author, but the recipient of the spiritual world and spiritual world of the original author
or performance of those exchanges, integration, creating a you have me, and I in the have your
new spiritual world process. In other words, to understand who is actually involved in the
understanding among those who were to be understood, so that their own understanding of
those who are being changed as a re-creation activities. To understand a person being
understood between the such mutual participation, integration features, makes the
understanding of the activities must demonstrate a creative or re-creative.

Hans-Georg Gadamer who will be the recipient of the performance demonstrated by the
participation and re-creation of something called "intermediate." He said: "We call things what
constitutes just such an expression for the meaning of the whole thing. This kind of thing exists
in itself is neither, nor is it by chance in an intermediary in the best experience to, this thing is
on this intermediate obtained its real existence. "26) (p152) At this point, Gadamer
emphasized: the spirit of product must undergo an" intermediary "- was accepted and was
involved in was re-creation is the practical significance of the living or real work. Really
works, only exists in the participant's "intermediary" activities. As Hans-Georg Gadamer said:
"intermediation (vermittlung) and the work itself is of no difference between the real
experience of work. ... ... In accordance with its concept of intermediation is a complete
intermediation. Thorough mediation means that mediation of the elements as an intermediary
intermediary and renounce their own. That is to say, as a re-creation of such an intermediary
(such as drama and music [performance], but also includes the epic or lyric poetry recitation)
does not become the core of things, the core of things is work through the re-creation re-
creation and manipulation to reach the performance of their own. "27) (pp155-156) At this
point, Gadamer explicitly as a re-creation activities of intermediaries. This re-creation
activities, both adaptation, performance, including reading, viewing and so on. Hans-Georg
Gadamer repeatedly stressed: that only those who participate in the re-creation or intermediary
activities, before there is a real work. As he said: "In the performances, and only performances
- most obviously in the music - we have met is the work itself, ... ... the work itself belongs to
which it was the performance of the world. Theatrical performances only when it is where is
the real presence, particularly in music must be ringing. ... ... Drama (schauspiel, here
translated as "Drama" and "schauspiel" the word should be translated as "watch" or translation
for "reading") activities Do not be understood as a certain game's demands, but to understand
the literary work itself into this in the event. ... ... the real existence of literary works ... ... lies
in the process of being displayed, only because as a drama (ibid., should be translated to
"watch" or "reading"), the performance of activities. "28) (pp150-151) involved in sexual and
re-creative sense, the intermediary can be seen as the eyes of Hans-Georg Gadamer's
understanding of the activities of the game as a fundamental nature, but also as a "composition
of [resultant]" a necessary condition for the work. In Gadamer's view: as a constituent matter
(resultant) of the real work can only be based on the game that is the way to understand the
activities exist. As he said: "the game that constitute the matter (taking into account the
integration of understanding of the activities or chemical combination of, here translated as"
constructs "and" gebilde "The word [original meaning as" the formation of things "] can
actually more appropriately translated as "resultant") ... ... the game was the game depends on
the process of ... ... On the other hand, constitute matter (resultant) as a game because it was
composed matter (resultant) ... ... only to be displayed at each in the process to reach its full
existence. "29) (p151)

5, (understanding) the conversion of the game or anabolic

What is "transformation"? How the game will be linked with the transformation of it? If the
basis of the general experience of the people on the game, then people generally think of the
game will not have anything to do with the transformation. However, in talking about for
understanding the activities, games, Hans-Georg Gadamer was not actually in people's general
experience on the game to talk about the level of the game. Hans-Georg Gadamer used in this
"transformation" concept is still the mind is used to explain his understanding of "game".

Hans-Georg Gadamer said: "I call this game is really pushing forward human to complete its
transformation into an arts complex known as the transformation of the composition. It is only
through such a transformation, the game was to win it the ideal nature of the game which may
be regarded as and understanding of creation. "30) (p142) At this point, Gadamer's view: It is
understood that the conversion makes the games to achieve its ideal state and to understand the
product to become creatures. So, in the end do what is transformation? Hans-Georg Gadamer
said: "The transformation (verwandlung) does not change (veranderung), ... ... to change things
at the same time as the original things that exist. ... ... Into it refers to something at once and
the whole becomes the other East and West, which as been translated into the other things that
have become the objects of the real presence, compared to this real existence, the existence of
the original material is no longer in place. ... ... to the composition of [generated objects] the
transformation means, there is something earlier no longer exists. ... ... what now exists in the
art game show things Naishi always the real thing. "31) (pp143-144) from this passage , we
have a general idea: the so-called "transformation" roughly equivalent to a "qualitative change"
and "change" refers to no more than the "degree" and thus the nature of things that can
maintain its "quantitative." Well, the game or understand the activities of another in the end of
this qualitative change in how the case? Hans-Georg Gadamer said: After transformation, "the
former player is the thing no longer exists ... ... the game itself is such a transformation, ie,
where the identity of persons involved in the game for any people who do not continue to
exist . ... ... the player (or poets) are no longer exists, the mere existence of the game is what
they are. "32) (pp143-144) separate from the thinking of Gadamer's hermeneutics, see these
words in isolation We will find incomprehensible. The so-called players in the game no longer
exists that kind of thing is so contrary to common sense of the. In fact, Gadamer so-called
"conversion" is still based understanding of the integration of activities and creativity. After
integration, both to understand or be understood by those who have undergone a qualitative
change, are no longer the original thing; and both understand that or be understood by those
who are no longer an independent self-existence, but after the formation of the whole fusion
blend with each other the way to coexist. In understanding the activities of those who really
exists is to understand and be understood and translated into the continuous integration
between the integrity of existence for the new process. Gadamer describes the understanding of
"game" nature of this transformation is very similar to the chemistry of the combination
reaction: 2 materialized kg to produce a new kind of thing - compounds. Such as: hydrogen
and oxygen combine to form water. In the combination reaction, the new resultant from the
original two things, they are no longer the original thing, but a new thing, the original things in
the loss of their own at the same time to get things in the new newborn. Gadamer's
understanding of the activities of mind as a "game" is such a spirit of combination reaction
activity. As the understanding of "game" of the participants in the "game" had to lose the
original self-absorbed whole in a new way to form part of the new life, so Hans-Georg
Gadamer said: In the "game" (understanding) in the does not exist ( "Game" before an
independent self-existent) "player", but exist only in "game itself" - "players" with the ever-
combined, and "conversion" to the new resultant process.

As Hans-Georg Gadamer calls "conversion" actually refers to the participation of "game"

between the parties to form a new holistic assimilation of the existence of the process,
therefore, in order to facilitate understanding, has been translated as "transformed" and
"verwandlung" In fact the word translated into more popular than "assimilation" or the more
professional but it is more clear "chemical combination." "Transformation" concept clear, the
"constitutes matter (resultant) concept of" naturally clear: the so-called "constitutes matter
(resultant)" is the encounter of two kinds of consciousness produced by the "chemical
combination consciousness", that is Hans-Georg Gadamer calls "effective historical
consciousness." Because it "constituted matter (resultant)" is a kind of new things different
from the original, so Hans-Georg Gadamer is also known as "creation."

Necessary to add that: Gadamer's understanding of the activities referred to as the "game" is a
mental phenomenon, he said "game" and the "viewers" actually refers only to participate in
this "game" of human consciousness, not including as a consciousness of those who carry
flesh. Thus, for Gadamer called the "game" of "players" to the group no longer exists, its
precise understanding of reality should be: access to two kinds of consciousness meets "game"
(integration activities), the the original sense of the existence of these two states would no
longer exist. Reposted elsewhere in the paper for free download http://www.hi138.com
6, (understanding) the game and at the same time with the sexual nature of

To illustrate understand the "game" (activity) of properties, Gadamer's concept of using a

number of illustrated from several aspects. Also at the same time, sex is sex and Hans-Georg
Gadamer used to describe the understanding of "game" the other two concepts.

Hans-Georg Gadamer said: " 'the same in (mabeisein)' means than with a kind of pure
existence of otherness at the same time the 'total in the (mitanwesenheit)' should be more. With
the means to participate (teilhabe). ... ... as in the derived sense, it refers to the way some of the
main act, namely, 'to concentrate on something (bei-der-sache-sein)'. so watch is a true
participatory approach. "33) (p161) At this point, Gadamer explicitly pointed out: the so-called
with the means to participate, that is to understand the spirit and the spirit of being understood
between the integration. On the understanding of "game" of the same in nature, Hans-Georg
Gadamer said: "with a kind of human behavior as the main activity with the presence of
external to themselves (aussersichsein) in nature. ... ... Existence of the external to their own
exactly the same thing on the positive possibilities. Such a forgetting of self that has the same
characteristics, and constitute the essence of the viewer, that is to forget to put a self-caught the
attention of things. ... ... It originated in that kind of thing complete focus, and this focus can be
seen as the viewer's own active. "34) (p163) At this point, Gadamer is from a psychological
point of view of carrying out the activities as possible to understand aPsychological state, this
state of mind is actually a general aesthetic psychology called "empathy" state. In the
"empathy" also said that Hans-Georg Gadamer, "as in" state, the people will produce a
material I can distinguish between things like forget my two lost souls like experience. In
Gadamer's view: This experience is the understanding of the activities of ecstasy into the ideal
symbol.

If we say that "with the" concept of space from some similar (mental content) to illustrate
aspects of understanding of "game" is the integration between the activities of the parties
involved, then, "simultaneity" concept is understood from the time to explain "game" the
integration of nature. What is a "simultaneous" mean? Hans-Georg Gadamer said: "At the
same sex (gleichzeitigkeit) Constitute a 'as in' nature. ... ... 'Simultaneous' means, a present to
us a single thing, even though its origin is so far away, but they won in the manifestations of
nature is now complete. ... ... Sex does not exist at the same time, but ... ... to be completely
linked to convey two things are not at the same time ... ... to make these two things remain, as a
matter of now (not as a matter of time) Experience was seriously being accepted. "35)
(p165)Hans-Georg Gadamer said: those who understand that there is always to understand the
spiritual world - content, structure and expectations-based, understanding of who always from
the spiritual world are already starting to look at things to be understood, while the can not be
content with a no, no pre-mirror to see the pure sense of style to go and things to be understood
encounter. As a result, the spirit of a bygone era understanding of the product, always
understand the present consciousness of those who own the content, structure and tendencies
to assimilate the spirit of the past existence of the process. The results of this assimilation,
making understood the spirit of the past is always present as a kind of presence there now. As
Gadamer said: "works generated from a bygone era ... .... Works as long as the play its role, it
is the same time with each one of the modern."36)(p156)Such remnants of historical
understanding which emerged in the past and present at the same time the phenomenon, that is,
the understanding of Gadamer said, "game" of simultaneity. In short, the so-called "together"
and "same time", it is actually used to describe Gadamer's understanding of the game in the
eyes of ordinary people rather than the nature of the concept. Now and has at the same time,
the same in the Yubi, which is the eyes of Hans-Georg Gadamer's understanding of the truth.

7, (understanding) the cyclical nature of the game, variation and identity

Discussed earlier participation, integration of nature, then so is the creative activity of a

particular understanding of a character. From the historical point of view, the recipient to
participate in the same text several times to understand the activity is a cyclical nature. Hans-
Georg Gadamer said: game "always refers to a constant movement from repetition, ... ... is
indeed a game to make it to suspend activities by no means an objective, but always updated
continuously repeating itself. And from the repetitive motion for the nature of the provisions of
the game is so obvious and fundamental, so who or what these activities Daoshi
irrelevant. ... ... the game is this from repeating the conduct of campaigns. "37)(p133)Must pay
attention to: Hans-Georg Gadamer mentioned here refers to the understanding of the game or
activity is not an ordinary game. Because: loop movement is the prevalence of open systems
approach; with a dissipative structure, the life of the system all the activities are actually
carried out in iterative way. As a result, iterative nature is not a difference between games and
non-gaming features. Contact Gadamer's hermeneutic thought, we can find: he used here,
"game" the cycle of sexual practice, or in describing the activities of certain characteristics of
understanding, namely the so-called "understanding of the cycle." In Gadamer's view: to
understand the cycle is repeated with the change, unity, rather than a simple constant circular
motion. As mid-season cycle of nature, but each cycle of the seasons occur, it would not have
had with the previous season the same, but always have something to update, change. People's
spiritual world is always in the proliferation of evolving. The understanding is that person to
present all of the spiritual world (content, structure, orientation) as the basis of and to
participate in the object to go with a re-creative activities. In this way, a different space-time
recipient of the same or a different recipient for the same text, the effect of acceptance of work
on all different, and this is to understand the deformation or variability. As Hans-Georg
Gadamer said: "As long as performance is the composition matter (resultant) their own
performance, and, as a constituent matter (resultant) their own performance has been judged,
performance is considered to be deformed."38)(p158)However, Gadamer also felt that: the
acceptance of the same text in different activities in the different manifestations of
fundamentally is unified. This is because: in Gadamer's view, the real (realize their own value)
is not the author of works created by the text, but the text by the recipient of the re-creation of
the main body formed by the spirit of integration between the objects. As a result, the real
work can only exist in the accepted process. Each time the text was accepted all of its work to
become a real opportunity, a way. If deprived of the acceptance of each formed by the specific
form and specific content of the real work, then, "the text is accepted" campaign, which
Gadamer calls "the work itself" is a constant, which Hans-Georg Gadamer has said that the
understanding of "game" identity. As he said: "works itself in the process of change is clearly
not the case has been split into various aspects, resulting in the loss of their identity. Works
itself exists in all aspects of these changes. All of these changes are all aspects of it. All the
changes are incompatible with It also co-exist.39)(p156) ... ... Works While their performance
may occur in as many changes and changes, but it is still itself. ... ... Each complex is on the
work itself is in fact the same origin. "40)(pp158--159)As the text is different on each occasion
of acceptance activities are "work itself" the realization of way, therefore, understand the
"game" of the variability and identity are unified. It is like a holiday every time the
celebrations are different implementations are of the same festival: "festive campaign is an
evolution of the times of the ... ..., although there is this historical change in surface, it is still
going through this the same kinds of evolution of a holiday celebration. "41)(p159)In short:
Understanding the "game" is a cyclical manner, the cyclical understanding of "game" is a
variation of the same unity of opposites. This is from a historical perspective of Gadamer's
understanding of "game" understanding.

Comprehensive understanding of Gadamer on the "game" in the above five areas of discussion,
we can understand him on the "game" point of view briefly summarized as follows: to
understand the "game" is the main sense of participation in each other and therefore have a re-
integration of the creative cycle of Reciprocating the spirit of the exchanges. As a result, on the
understanding of this "game" theory can be called the "participation" that "integration" that
"re-creation," said the other. Taking into account the "integration" in the generality of the
strongest (integration of activities will certainly include a participatory and has re-creative), we
can choose to Hans-Georg Gadamer on the understanding of "game" theory called
"convergence" theory.

Recall our understanding of "game" of discussion, we noted that: understanding the "game", by
Hans-Georg Gadamer has also proposed an "art game" concept. For a more complete idea of
the game show Hans-Georg Gadamer, in this, let us the concept of this game is to make a brief
introduction. To sum up, Gadamer's concept of art can be expressed as: Art is a combination of
emotional and non-perceptual performance of the composite consciousness and acceptance of
activities is a composite understanding of the game.* As a result, we can Gadamer on the "art"
or "art (understanding) game," the doctrine known as "composite understanding of the
activities of" theory or the "composite" theory.

Discussion of this point, we have cleaned out the eyes of Hans-Georg Gadamer's three game
concept, namely: one, as the self-concept for the activities of the game; 2, as the subjective
consciousness of participation in integration activities between the understanding of "game"
concept; 3, As a composite understanding of the activities of game concept art. We have seen:
from the theory of games theory of games with people's general experience on the line, and
therefore, we can see it as Gadamer's theory of general game. The integration of the theory of
games with people on the experience of the game in general quite different, so that we can only
see it as Hans-Georg Gadamer on the specific game he had in mind - to understand the
activities of the doctrine, not to make it look be of universal significance of the game theory
(Gadamer in the eyes of understanding "game" which has the majority of the general nature of
the game does not have or do not have any). As the mutual understanding and exchanges
between the communities can be seen as an intrinsic need to satisfy this need can be seen as a
kind of inner communication community purpose, and therefore, according to Hans-Georg
Gadamer's "self as a" theory to understand activities are also can be seen as Community self-
expression, communication and self-understanding sense of collective game. As a result, if the
activities of the game as seen from the eyes of Hans-Georg Gadamer generalized games, then,
as the understanding of the activities of the game can be seen as the eyes of Hans-Georg
Gadamer narrow the game, but as a composite understanding of activities, arts and game is a
game Gadamer narrow mind - understanding of the game in a small class, but also the minds of
the most typical of Gadamer's understanding of the game. Gadamer's concept of three games
between the eyes and the corresponding three kinds of game theory or application of the
universality of the surface layer by layer between the descending constitute an inclusive
relationship. This is our discussion of the conclusions.

Note:
1--17,(Germany)Gadamer.Truth and Method.Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing
House,1999.
18, Hung H & Q Asia.To understand the truth of.Jinan.Shandong People's Publishing
House,2001.
19--41(Germany)Gadamer.Truth and Method.Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing
House,1999. Reposted elsewhere in the Free Paper Download Center http://www.hi138.com